The current situation in a nutshell.

[DanAlcedo.3281]

 

6+years WvW Player:

 

Mounts are not a good idea.

 

PvE Player that never played WvW before:

 

I disagree. I know better.

 

 

PvP players:

 

Balance Patch next week huh?

 

„Nervous sweating“

[Cyninja.2954]

Pve players before PoF:

No mounts!

 

PvE players after PoF:

Yay, mounts.

 

WvW players before Warclaw:

No mounts.

 

WvW players after Warclaw:

?

 

How about we wait and see? The addition of the Warclaw might be beneficial to the game mode overall, or not. What I find most interesting is how limited the discussion around it is. People are not considering:

- a mount might lead to new map designs

- might lead to required performance improvements

- will very likely change how Sieg warfare plays out

- might lead to ttk of gates needimg adjusting as to give sides the ability to respond

- will at the very least temporarily expose a larger part of the player base to WvW, which hopefully will have a positive effect on the game mode and the resources devoted to it

 

It's basically a small step into a new direction as far as attention to WvW goes. Yet people just go bananas. Maybe after 6 years some fresh air to breathe some life into the game mode (and hopefully expand on this) is a good thing.

[zengara.8301]

I agree that people jumped the gun a bit fast there, the marketing team did market this pretty bad to be completely honest. But based on in game responses to gliders back in the day, people kinda wanted mounts. I think the main reason people are mad, is that it isnt just a point A-B kind of mount, it will actually play a part in fighting, rather than just positioning.

 

Also some are mad about roaming and lag, but both issues seems kinda weird since lag is based your computer and with roaming, you should easily be able to teleport away, and then get on a mount.

[Neural.1824]

My primary curiosity about the Warclaw is how Arenanet has developed things in order to limit it's use.

 

If it has unlimited mount time, etc., and is placed in as something along the lines of a mastery, like gliding, arrow carts, etc., then with the ability to re-allocate those points, everyone with enough points is going to unlock it in full and any potential advantages that the devs may have missed are going to be blown way out of proportion.

 

If there are pack advantages, I can see the possibility of entire WvW guilds where entry requirements are the ability to use the mount.

 

We'll have to see what they've come up with. Really nice looking mount though.

[Vyrulisse.1246]

WvW Player: Our game mode is dead and no one wants to play it. We're sick of this!

A.net: Alright we'll do stuff to try and get more people in there.

WvW Player: No! We don't want anyone in our sandbox!

[sigur.9453]

to me it looks like they want to fix a broken leg with a tiny band-aid. but it´s one with a cool batman logo on it, yay.

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> How about we wait and see? The addition of the Warclaw might be beneficial to the game mode overall, or not. What I find most interesting is how limited the discussion around it is. People are not considering:

> - a mount might lead to new map designs

No new maps or big map reworks planned. They apparently do not have dev power for it.

 

> - might lead to required performance improvements

...if all the other thinks (like Djinn's Dominion, or some very known cases in PvE) won't cause that, then a cat mount in WvW surely won't either.

 

> - will very likely change how Sieg warfare plays out

Yes. That's one of the main issues, by the way.

 

> - might lead to ttk of gates needimg adjusting as to give sides the ability to respond

...and kitten over (pun fully intended) everyone not using mounts for said gates? (remember, defender response time will go down due to mount mobility).

 

> - will at the very least temporarily expose a larger part of the player base to WvW, which hopefully will have a positive effect on the game mode and the resources devoted to it

Remember WvW tournaments? Those had a net negative result on the WvW population. The number of people that stayed did not balance those that left. The only possible hope here is if the mount will be locked behind a higher wvw rank and/or ticket grind (but then expect pve player outrage).

 

> It's basically a small step into a new direction as far as attention to WvW goes. Yet people just go bananas.

Perhaps maybe because they are _looking_ in that direction, and see things they'd rather not hit into.

 

> Maybe after 6 years some fresh air to breathe some life into the game mode (and hopefully expand on this) is a good thing.

Won't really work without fixing some core flaws first. At best it's painting the dying grass green. At worst, the paint might end up toxic.

 

Well, PvE players like me will probably like it. On the other hand, have played enough WvW in the past to see why many WvW players might not.

 

 

[Haleydawn.3764]

Hilarious that because WvW will be getting a unique mount, people assume Anet aren’t working on other WvW improvements... a mount was probably the easiest and quickest to refine and implement. Let’s hold all judgment until the patch comes before deciding WvW is dead (again).

[zengara.8301]

> @"Neural.1824" said:

> My primary curiosity about the Warclaw is how Arenanet has developed things in order to limit it's use.

>

> If it has unlimited mount time, etc., and is placed in as something along the lines of a mastery, like gliding, arrow carts, etc., then with the ability to re-allocate those points, everyone with enough points is going to unlock it in full and any potential advantages that the devs may have missed are going to be blown way out of proportion.

>

> If there are pack advantages, I can see the possibility of entire WvW guilds where entry requirements are the ability to use the mount.

>

> We'll have to see what they've come up with. Really nice looking mount though.

 

Guess you arent much of a WvW player xD Most people in wvw got way to many points already, so I just think people dont care rather than actually asking. Gear/builds is a huge factor in WvW and nobody saying that you need legendary gear to join.

Honestly all the BS aside with lag issues or gankers not being able to gank or all other bs theories this will entail (Answer; 80+80+80 people in wvw combat, get a better computer. Teleport and use mount that got the same speed as opponent mount)

 

Only thing worth talking about is zerg fighting. Will mounts have HP, Does this mean you can sandwich opponent army better since they cant react in other words, you can reach them faster and they literally cant move away+you got a boost health. How much dmg does the mount jump do? Will it be like other mounts where it deals decent dmg, if so can you just bomb an area with it, which will make zerg fighting intolerable since either nobody wants to fight, or it will be a stronger sense of 2v1 situation.

 

Honestly anything based on the comments I have seen, anything but that is a waste of time to talk about, and also a huge reason as to why it was a stupid idea for A-Net to bow down to much for its fans, since they also want to explorer radical fun ideas rather than balance things out. (based on their own words as to why they picked the new classes they did)

[Dawdler.8521]

WvW players: *"We're only here for the fights, why dont people come to fight us?!"*

 

Also WvW players: *"Now people can come faster to fights, what even is this WvW is deeeeeeaaaaaaad!"*

 

I'm a 90% WvW player and I still think this is absolutely hilarious to watch. Mounts are pointless and a waste of time and we could have done without them, but some of the threads... man...

[Bloodstealer.5978]

And we needed yet another thread put out by same posters in the other plethora of threads about the same subject... was there no room in the other thread/threads??

[L A T I O N.8923]

> @"zengara.8301" said:

> I agree that people jumped the gun a bit fast there, the marketing team did market this pretty bad to be completely honest. But based on in game responses to gliders back in the day, people kinda wanted mounts. I think the main reason people are mad, is that it isnt just a point A-B kind of mount, it will actually play a part in fighting, rather than just positioning.

>

> Also some are mad about roaming and lag, but both issues seems kinda weird since lag is based your computer and with roaming, you should easily be able to teleport away, and then get on a mount.

 

Its a matter of political change that might have worked vetter, alot of restrictions on the mount (only able to mount in Spawn and Just capable of using in own areas, getting dismounted right away') untill the point of how they release IT now

 

We can agree is has An impact, the variables (like movement speed, which is important to wvw community), skills (which is important to roamers) we dont know

So many things still unknown and the information released was more about raising uncertainty towards wvw players (can the third skill jump 1200range in the air because then you'll have at least 4 Towers and 2 keeps on which you van skip a wall). As a core wvw player (roaming, zerging, ganking, gvg) IT makes me nervous in all sort of wat

 

Because IT can influence my gameplay big time

[DeceiverX.8361]

> @"zengara.8301" said:

> I agree that people jumped the gun a bit fast there, the marketing team did market this pretty bad to be completely honest. But based on in game responses to gliders back in the day, people kinda wanted mounts. I think the main reason people are mad, is that it isnt just a point A-B kind of mount, it will actually play a part in fighting, rather than just positioning.

>

> Also some are mad about roaming and lag, but both issues seems kinda weird since lag is based your computer and with roaming, you should easily be able to teleport away, and then get on a mount.

 

Lag is absolutely NOT based solely on the computer. Server-side delays that affect the whole map are very common as a result of larger fights in WvW.

 

Here's the thing: Mounts aren't just an OOC boost from the announcement, and stuff like extra mobility does take away from the classes and styles of play that depend on it to rapidly traverse the map and take smaller objectives.

 

It's also ignoring the fact gliding broke WvW for months due to the bugs it came with that let people glide into enemy towers and take them without siege/spending time/supply. People don't care about these features because unless they release flawlessly, which everyone doubts they will, they only bring some net-negatives.

[zengara.8301]

> @"DeceiverX.8361" said:

> > @"zengara.8301" said:

> > I agree that people jumped the gun a bit fast there, the marketing team did market this pretty bad to be completely honest. But based on in game responses to gliders back in the day, people kinda wanted mounts. I think the main reason people are mad, is that it isnt just a point A-B kind of mount, it will actually play a part in fighting, rather than just positioning.

> >

> > Also some are mad about roaming and lag, but both issues seems kinda weird since lag is based your computer and with roaming, you should easily be able to teleport away, and then get on a mount.

>

> Lag is absolutely NOT based solely on the computer. Server-side delays that affect the whole map are very common as a result of larger fights in WvW.

>

> Here's the thing: Mounts aren't just an OOC boost from the announcement, and stuff like extra mobility does take away from the classes and styles of play that depend on it to rapidly traverse the map and take smaller objectives.

 

Obviously lag isnt solely based on computer, and the server setup is a part of why lag occurs. I dont know the full details of how to minimize lag from A-Nets side, but it is quiet impressive that they got 150+ people on the same field. Either way there are many 3way wvw video footage on youtube in what looks to be a 80-80-80 fight with around 30-60 fps and full fledged graphics, since that is the case, I find it hard to believe that it is because Gw2 is poorly optimized.

 

Based on roamers, I still dont fully see how they wont just be able to stealth or teleport 2-3 times away as they currently are doing and then get on a mount while being on the same speed as the opponent just further away?

 

Based on capturing objectives. I honestly dont know how much faster it will be compared to swiftness, but if they are equally as fast as normal running mounts, it wont be a heck of a lot faster to reach objectives for roamers. I only think that North Camp will be easiere to defend in theory. Or some other camp near keeps were it isnt easiere just to glide over water or where it is a long fall down.

 

But yeah I agree, North Camp might in theory be harder to attack and acquire. Though the whole thing with running away seems to be kinda bs

[DanAlcedo.3281]

> @"Bloodstealer.5978" said:

> And we needed yet another thread put out by same posters in the other plethora of threads about the same subject... was there no room in the other thread/threads??

 

Still Waiting for the „WvW Mount Feedback [Merged]“

 

 

[Inoki.6048]

You know @"Cyninja.2954", maybe people wouldn't be so much against mounts if the company addressed long term issues first. Then add whatever they want.

[Straegen.2938]

WvW players pre-announcement: Game mode is dead

WvW players post-announcement: The queues are going to ruin WvW

 

[DanAlcedo.3281]

> @"Straegen.2938" said:

> WvW players pre-announcement: Game mode is dead

> WvW players post-announcement: The queues are going to ruin WvW

>

 

Its not the queues.

Its the reason why we will have queues.

 

 

[Cristalyan.5728]

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> Pve players before PoF:

> No mounts!

>

> PvE players after PoF:

> Yay, mounts.

>

> WvW players before Warclaw:

> No mounts.

>

> WvW players after Warclaw:

> ?

>

> How about we wait and see? The addition of the Warclaw might be beneficial to the game mode overall, or not. What I find most interesting is how limited the discussion around it is. People are not considering:

> - a mount might lead to new map designs

> - might lead to required performance improvements

> - will very likely change how Sieg warfare plays out

> - might lead to ttk of gates needimg adjusting as to give sides the ability to respond

> - will at the very least temporarily expose a larger part of the player base to WvW, which hopefully will have a positive effect on the game mode and the resources devoted to it

>

> It's basically a small step into a new direction as far as attention to WvW goes. Yet people just go bananas. Maybe after 6 years some fresh air to breathe some life into the game mode (and hopefully expand on this) is a good thing.

 

I'm one of the PVE players still considering the mounts a **bad** idea in core Tyria. I also keep my opinion that even **gliding** is bad for the core Tyria.

The WvW was designed without the mounts in mind. So, the first thing ANet should have done is to launch a map designed for the mixture mounted + unmounted combat and to test it. Or to test the mounts in EotM - as per statements of what EotM should be: a testing ground for future changes. Nothing done. Ignoring the requests to **not** introduce the mounts in WvW. Because, **they know better**.

 

The first thing becoming useless is the actual system of supplies and supply counters in camps/towers/keeps. You don't need supplies - you have your own mobile ram. Also able to dash forward being invulnerable and to attack the enemy. Why supplies? Adjusting the TTK for gates? With other words making them stronger or having higher HP? What about an unmounted attack against the gates? It will take an eternity.

 

From what we know now, a ram can be disabled by siege disables. And you can destroy a ram with an AC. Sometimes making the attack to fail because of lack of resources. You cannot disable a mount. And even if you use an AC against a mount, after dismounting you go outside the AC range, OoC, mount again and attack again the gate. No need to worry about resources. So, I agree with you : this change **will change how Sieg warfare plays out**. By eliminating the need of Sieges.

 

A thing makes me to worry the most: The WvW mount will be used in PVE too. Only few week are needed until the PVE playerbase will ask the usage of ALL the mounts in WvW. Because is unfair that only the WvW mount to be in both game modes. So, I expect very soon the rest of the mounts in WvW. No matter the consequences - it is a small step in a new direction =)

[Bloodstealer.5978]

> @"Cristalyan.5728" said:

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > Pve players before PoF:

> > No mounts!

> >

> > PvE players after PoF:

> > Yay, mounts.

> >

> > WvW players before Warclaw:

> > No mounts.

> >

> > WvW players after Warclaw:

> > ?

> >

> > How about we wait and see? The addition of the Warclaw might be beneficial to the game mode overall, or not. What I find most interesting is how limited the discussion around it is. People are not considering:

> > - a mount might lead to new map designs

> > - might lead to required performance improvements

> > - will very likely change how Sieg warfare plays out

> > - might lead to ttk of gates needimg adjusting as to give sides the ability to respond

> > - will at the very least temporarily expose a larger part of the player base to WvW, which hopefully will have a positive effect on the game mode and the resources devoted to it

> >

> > It's basically a small step into a new direction as far as attention to WvW goes. Yet people just go bananas. Maybe after 6 years some fresh air to breathe some life into the game mode (and hopefully expand on this) is a good thing.

>

> I'm one of the PVE players still considering the mounts a **bad** idea in core Tyria. I also keep my opinion that even **gliding** is bad for the core Tyria.

> The WvW was designed without the mounts in mind. So, the first thing ANet should have done is to launch a map designed for the mixture mounted + unmounted combat and to test it. Or to test the mounts in EotM - as per statements of what EotM should be: a testing ground for future changes. Nothing done. Ignoring the requests to **not** introduce the mounts in WvW. Because, **they know better**.

>

> The first thing becoming useless is the actual system of supplies and supply counters in camps/towers/keeps. You don't need supplies - you have your own mobile ram. Also able to dash forward being invulnerable and to attack the enemy. Why supplies? Adjusting the TTK for gates? With other words making them stronger or having higher HP? What about an unmounted attack against the gates? It will take an eternity.

>

> From what we know now, a ram can be disabled by siege disables. And you can destroy a ram with an AC. Sometimes making the attack to fail because of lack of resources. You cannot disable a mount. And even if you use an AC against a mount, after dismounting you go outside the AC range, OoC, mount again and attack again the gate. No need to worry about resources. So, I agree with you : this change **will change how Sieg warfare plays out**. By eliminating the need of Sieges.

>

> A thing makes me to worry the most: The WvW mount will be used in PVE too. Only few week are needed until the PVE playerbase will ask the usage of ALL the mounts in WvW. Because is unfair that only the WvW mount to be in both game modes. So, I expect very soon the rest of the mounts in WvW. No matter the consequences - it is a small step in a new direction =)

 

TBH - I don't consider this to be a small step in a new direction - I am of the mind this will be just another step in the same direction of monetising elements of this game mode, like others of late. Perhaps the latest quarterly didn't go down to well and its all hands on the pump to push more revenue no matter how it affects those that never wanted this, which from my guesstimation is a heck of a high percentage of the wvw community, when considering there are many more pressing needs within the mode and has been for a long time... but of course ANET are listening and they value are feedback and opinions.

But until we know for certain what this mount is, what it does and doesn't do and how it really will affect things within the mode.. it's all just hearsay for now... for now!

[perilisk.1874]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > How about we wait and see? The addition of the Warclaw might be beneficial to the game mode overall, or not. What I find most interesting is how limited the discussion around it is. People are not considering:

> > - a mount might lead to new map designs

> No new maps or big map reworks planned. They apparently do not have dev power for it.

 

The game modes that get dev power are the ones that sell gems. Like, ones with mount skins, for instance.

[Ben K.6238]

> @"perilisk.1874" said:

> The game modes that get dev power are the ones that sell gems. Like, ones with mount skins, for instance.

 

Guilty as charged. I've never paid for a transfer so they had to get me another way.

 

I'm slightly amused that this mount looks rather like a charr though. It's like the joke in Labyrinthine Cliffs turned into reality.

[PookieDaWombat.6209]

> @"Vyrulisse.1246" said:

> WvW Player: Our game mode is dead and no one wants to play it. We're sick of this!

> A.net: Alright we'll do stuff to try and get more people in there.

> WvW Player: No! We don't want anyone in our sandbox!

 

Disingenuous straw man. Its not that WvW players don't want new blood in the game mode and everything to do with begging for years for things to be fixed about the game mode, and every time ... every single time ... Anet introduces a change that was a) not asked for b) only seemed to temporarily bring in a flood of "new" players from PvE looking to earn a new shiny before they left both the game mode and the server they transferred to (when that was a thing) c) wondered why WvW players were annoyed and assured us that they were working on the things we asked to be looked into. Anet's only fix for WvW was trying to find ways to drive people into the game mode as if having queues flooded and long wait times to play was the same thing as making the game mode rewarding for those that had been playing it.

[Rashagar.8349]

> @"PookieDaWombat.6209" said:

> > @"Vyrulisse.1246" said:

> > WvW Player: Our game mode is dead and no one wants to play it. We're sick of this!

> > A.net: Alright we'll do stuff to try and get more people in there.

> > WvW Player: No! We don't want anyone in our sandbox!

>

> Disingenuous straw man. Its not that WvW players don't want new blood in the game mode and everything to do with begging for years for things to be fixed about the game mode, and every time ... every single time ... Anet introduces a change that was a) not asked for b) only seemed to temporarily bring in a flood of "new" players from PvE looking to earn a new shiny before they left both the game mode and the server they transferred to (when that was a thing) c) wondered why WvW players were annoyed and assured us that they were working on the things we asked to be looked into. Anet's only fix for WvW was trying to find ways to drive people into the game mode as if having queues flooded and long wait times to play was the same thing as making the game mode rewarding for those that had been playing it.

 

In fairness, I was around to see new maps/new borderlands be something that players asked for. And gliding in wvw. And participation bonuses/sharing for scouts. And an improved reward system. And removing crafting tables (of all things always felt like the weirdest thing for players to demonise to me). And giving slower professions the tools to be vaguely relevant for roaming. And a means for reducing the time to get to where the action is happening on a map. (Just off the top of my head.)

 

So I think your's is the disingenuous post here.

[PookieDaWombat.6209]

> @"Rashagar.8349" said:

> In fairness, I was around to see new maps/new borderlands be something that players asked for. And gliding in wvw. And participation bonuses/sharing for scouts. And an improved reward system. And removing crafting tables (of all things always felt like the weirdest thing for players to demonise to me). And giving slower professions the tools to be vaguely relevant for roaming. And a means for reducing the time to get to where the action is happening on a map. (Just off the top of my head.)

>

> So I think your's is the disingenuous post here.

 

Yeah, been here since beta and I saw all those things too. Lets point by point this one:

* Yep, asked for new maps after old ones were altered to include the middle shrines and while some liked the DBL when it was tested, there were inherent problems with its in game implementation and Anet took too long to address those issues turning that map and its use into a dud.

* Many of us were against gliding and conceded that DBL might be the only place it would work well given the height of the map. Many of us didn't want to see it in the Alpine maps, yet there it is. And it trivialized certain kinds of game play on those maps to this day.

* "Improved" rewards system that encourages tapping a few guards or a camp then idling in the spawn area while rewards role in while not contributing to the progress of the match or jumping from map to map until you're outnumbered so you get more pips for minimal effort.

* Crafting tables in WvW was causing people who didn't play to fill in those maps to use those assets while once again not contributing and taking up space and increasing queue times for actual WvW players.

* Minor speed balance patches pale in comparison to the insane power creep that players have been asking Anet to address along with other basic issues such as lag.